# LazyCall, again, sorry
**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629
**Category:** Internals & Design
**Created:** [January 26, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629 "2018-01-26T20:53:48Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@bramtayl](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bramtayl)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/1 "2018-01-26T20:53:48Z")
It seems like the only way out of this pickle is to either mark containers you want to iterate (or scalars you don’t want to iterate). Anyways, here’s a proposal:
A lazy call object contains both a function and its arguments. For example,
```julia
LazyCall((a, b) -> a + b + 1, (A, B))
```
There is special syntax for making a lazy call.
`.( ~A + ~B)` is syntactic sugar for the above
You can call a function on a LazyCall, also with special syntax:
```julia
broadcast.( ~A + ~B + 1)
```
You could just as easily do:
```julia
filter.( ~A > 1)
```
Sorry for possibly derailing the thread. I just though I’d mention that an abstraction I’ve been working on for a long time could unequivocally sort out this conflict.
Here is another idea: ~ alone could signify an anonymous function, so
```julia
.( ~ + 1)
```
goes to
```julia
x - x + 1
```
so that
```julia
A |>
.( ~ + 1)
```
could be a syntax for chaining
---
### Author:  [@bramtayl](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bramtayl)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 8:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/2 "2018-01-26T20:55:50Z")
Not sure how to deal with functions like `broadcast!` in this proposal
---
### Author:  [@bramtayl](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bramtayl)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 9:04pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/3 "2018-01-26T21:04:46Z")
Maybe
```julia
.( ~A = ~B + ~C + 1)
```
Goes to
```julia
LazyEquation( (b, c) -> b + c + 1, A, (B, C) )
```
???
---
### Author:  [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 10:50pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/4 "2018-01-26T22:50:49Z")
Are you “marking” the objects to be treated as containers with a `~`? Instead of always assuming everything is a scalar unless specially marked, it’s easier to go the other way since that requires no special syntax: `(1,) .+ A .* (3,)`.
It might also be worth pointing out that I’m actively working on getting a “lazy” broadcast representation into 1.0: [https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/25377](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/25377). You won’t typically see or work with it, but it’s what will enable extensible fusion.
---
### Author:  [@bramtayl](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bramtayl)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 11:22pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/5 "2018-01-26T23:22:38Z")
I guess `(1,) .+ A .* (3,)` could work too. You are missing out on the ability to choose other verbs. I’m not sure if it’s more terse or not.
---
### Author:  [@bramtayl](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/bramtayl)
#### Post date: [January 26, 2018, 11:26pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lazycall-again-sorry/8629/6 "2018-01-26T23:26:06Z")
#25377 looks really cool btw